I forgot to recommend removing faction locking from the masters division. Now that Allies and Soviets are more or less on even footing, competitive players are able to play both equally. Allowing players to choose which faction they want to play will add a level of intrigue as faction choice is often a strategic decision based on the player we are against and what the map is. Faction locking restricts an element of gamesmanship that would add to excitement of masters division.

If not that, I'd recommend at the very least making all masters players play as 'any'.

"Do not trust the balance tzars (Smitty, Orb). They are making the changes either for the wrong reasons, for no reason at all, or just because they can and it makes them feel good." - Alex Jones

Smitty wrote: ↑
If not that, I'd recommend at the very least making all masters players play as 'any'.

This is something I can get down with. Shows proficiency at playing all factions as opposed to picking your strongest. The thing about the current set up is that most allies players will choose British. Its the smartest option since most games dont go into the late game. Forcing any gets us to see more factions at work.

But then we'll get players who are unhappy for getting France every game!

Another option is that masters have to pick the 5 factions in their own order. And after 5 games they must again play all 5 factions in another own preferred order. This would however require registrating who played what (prone to error) and youll get situations like Â¨ah, this is his 5th game and he hasnt played France yet, so Ill pick a map that is bad for France". Not sure if such tactics are a bad thing, though.

By the way: played this map by Mo and I really like the awkward start, while still having plenty of options.

Smitty wrote: ↑If not that, I'd recommend at the very least making all masters players play as 'any'.

-1. I think this introduces too much chance into the tournament. Some players will definitely be better with certain factions and a bad draw from 'any' could leave a superior player using a faction they aren't good with vs an inferior player with their best faction, ending with the worse player winning even though if they had their faction choice it would have been the other way around.

In think no matter if we change masters division faction rule or not, there has to be some kind of a clear ruling for choosing factions. Something like home map picks faction first / last would be easiest.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.-Sun Tzu

Yeah , clear rules on that for any league would be nice. Was thinking about some variations:

- Player may not choose the same faction in both games (= if a player picks England, in 2nd game he cant pick England)
- Players may not choose the same side (Soviet/Allies). (= picked soviet first game? must choose Allies next game)
- If a player picks "Any" AND opponent picks his favorite in the first game, THEN the "Any"-player may pick the faction for the opponent next game. If both pick "Any", then nothing changes to the selection of the faction for the second game.
- If a player picks a faction, then in the second game he must pick the Â¨Any-faction" of the opposing group - or the other way around. Example 1: player picks Germany, he must pick "Soviet-any" in 2nd round. Example 2: Player picks "Allies-any" in the first game, he is allowed to pick either Russia or Ukraine in the 2nd game.

I think in every game it should be clear who is the first person to pick a map and who is second. In general there should be rules for that to prevent any discussion.
Extra possibility, allthough complex, could be that the player who is willing to go "Any" in the first game, is the one who chooses the map second. But personally I think it should be disconnected.

noobmapmaker wrote: ↑Yeah , clear rules on that for any league would be nice. Was thinking about some variations:

- Player may not choose the same faction in both games (= if a player picks England, in 2nd game he cant pick England)
- Players may not choose the same side (Soviet/Allies). (= picked soviet first game? must choose Allies next game)
- If a player picks "Any" AND opponent picks his favorite in the first game, THEN the "Any"-player may pick the faction for the opponent next game. If both pick "Any", then nothing changes to the selection of the faction for the second game.
- If a player picks a faction, then in the second game he must pick the Â¨Any-faction" of the opposing group - or the other way around. Example 1: player picks Germany, he must pick "Soviet-any" in 2nd round. Example 2: Player picks "Allies-any" in the first game, he is allowed to pick either Russia or Ukraine in the 2nd game.

I think in every game it should be clear who is the first person to pick a map and who is second. In general there should be rules for that to prevent any discussion.
Extra possibility, allthough complex, could be that the player who is willing to go "Any" in the first game, is the one who chooses the map second. But personally I think it should be disconnected.

The simpler the rules are, the better. Players should be free to pick any faction they want in all matches. Agree that the order of picking should be set beforehand. Home player picks map, Guest player then picks faction, then home player picks faction would be my suggestion.

1. Allowing players to play their matchup ahead of schedule. Firstly input from SoScared is appreciated on why this wasn't on the board before (or just slap me with a trout if it was and I didn't read those S01..S02 discussion threads). This could speed up the season if several players have spare time to play additional games, especially if there are forfeits - the table could be finished some weeks early, leaving more space for playoffs and grand finals (I assume there would be grand finals for Masters top4, right?).

2. A selected TV-match: one matchup from each round (any division, but given the purpose it will usually be Masters ofc) is chosen (at least 2 weeks prior to event) as streamable, can't be played before schedule, has a fixed date/time and is streamed online. Requires a willing streamer though and for the selected match opponents to be available at specific time which can be a burden. But looks great as a highlight of the table-deciders and a game hype build-up.

Also I'm willing to help organizing the S04 as in crunching through emails, writing fixtures and tables and such. If there is someone to pick up flag from SoScared, you can PM me through discord.

update:
followup idea after reading the discussion thread.
Allow players that had strikes due to missing their game to still play it like it has been delayed. Strikes can still stand reducing points (i.e. -1 point per strike; this way a player can still be in plus if wins delayed match 2-0, getting +1 in total), but we will still have a match to watch and a spread of points beetween the players (especially if one wins 2-0) instead of just match forfeit for both. Maybe it can be a thing too if only one player failed to appear; -1 point for him stands anyway, but he can ask his opponent to reschedule and play the game; opponent has the right to refuse (this way he gets 0 points for the game) or agrees for a delayed match.

Season 3 was my first RAGL and firstly wonna say a Massive Thanks to SoS and Jazz for letting me in sooo late, Also to my Bro Zaqzorn for telling me about it.

I had a really fun time and thanks to all in Recruit Beta for the matches also taking a little time taking to help me improve. you wonderful ppl

The map pool was good, although Id like to see more classic maps from the original game, hence my love for Keep off the Grass 2.

I do however, struggle with reading and found myself reading the rules over and over and it still didn't make sense. so this was a bit of a learning experience when things went alittle tits up near the end of the season,

I didnt expect it to be easy but there was alot of Skilled players in Beta. Personally i was excited about the challenge but still overwhelmed. This can be down to a few reasons, Like It was their first season etc. to be truthful I dont know how we can fix this (i do like the idea of a optional "Cadet" division which new and less skilled players and ask to be put in)

Also I feel that that RAGL took a long time, maybe fighting 2 opponents a week would be a better and more streamlined.

These are my thoughts, Anyways Cheers for a fun time, And looking forward to season 4 (Sign me Up!!!!!!!!!!!)

netnazgul wrote: ↑1. Allowing players to play their matchup ahead of schedule. Firstly input from SoScared is appreciated on why this wasn't on the board before (or just slap me with a trout if it was and I didn't read those S01..S02 discussion threads). This could speed up the season if several players have spare time to play additional games, especially if there are forfeits - the table could be finished some weeks early, leaving more space for playoffs and grand finals (I assume there would be grand finals for Masters top4, right?).

I'm almost certain that playing your games early is fine, as long as your opponent agrees to this of course.

"Each denomination in the new series of banknotes will feature a different species of Australian wattle"- Mint Spokesman